Forum:CT:Sourcing gender for Legends clones

This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made in the Senate Hall or new Consensus track pages rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record.
The result of the debate was Oppose proposal. AnilSerifoglu (talk) 00:57, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

---

Following up on the discussion in Forum:SH:Jango clones, Legends and gender I’m proposing we treat Legends statements on clone troopers as more generalised statements and less absolute statements for every clone. This would involve making Legends clones have standards for sourcing gender similar to the pages for most sentients, thus making sure the gender references are more specific to each character.JM1998 (talk) 18:44, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. JM1998 (talk) 18:44, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
2. Per JM and my comments on the SH, this is not a case of ignoring the source material but documenting a generalisation—a blanket statement to all clones of Jango Fett that I think is incompatible with gender as a personal, internal perception of oneself—in a fair and consistent manner. A Legends clone's article shouldn't need to go out of its way to specify that they're individually male, which I think is a stretch from the Databank entry, but instead simply say that their genetic donor was male. OOM 224 (he/him/they) 21:30, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
3. AnilSerifoglu (talk) 23:25, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
4. Per OOM. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 08:10, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
5. Per OOM 224's reasoning. — Commander Bhatoa (talk) 23:16, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Per my thoughts on the SH, Wookieepedia is meant to document the information we are given. Legends sources say all clones are male, we should document as such. Rsand 30 (talk) 18:48, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
2. Fan26 (Talk) 18:54, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
3. Don't see why we should ignore the sources. Xd1358 ^(Talk) 19:08, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
4. JMAS ^{Hey, it's me!} 19:43, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
5. We take what we are given SaintSirNicholas (talk) 20:00, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
6. As much as I hate the way Legends treats clone trooper gender, I still think that we should document what's written as accurately as possible. CT-1742 (talk) 00:14, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
7. Per my reasoning in the SH. SorcererSupreme21 (talk) 00:27, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
8. It may be a generalization, but that's how the documentation, a product of its time, handle this notion. NanoLuuke^{Cloning Facility} 05:02, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
9. Per Rsand and Nano. Bonzane10 black belt in card-jitsu 08:29, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
10. NBDani (they/them)^{Yeager's Repairs} 19:06, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
11. Artemaeus-Creed (talk) 22:06, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
12. Logan.Likes.Legends (talk) 01:15, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
13. Janomoogo (talk) 10:13, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
14. ThrawnChiss7 ^{Assembly Cupola} 15:21, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
15. JediMasterMacaroni^(Talk) 18:42, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Discuss

• Don't have the voting rights, but I do want to bring your attention to the fact that Star Wars Legends is, in general, very much an embodiment of Planet of Hats trope, and this is a particular manifestation. Clones are meant to be similar, including by Kaminoans ruthlessly destroying most somehow non-conforming ones (for instance, only direct involvement by instructor saved the Star Wars: Republic Commando squad). Frankly, my impression is that in Legends, someone like Sister would have been likewise annihilated because that's how Kaminoans conduct their business. Demetrius Viridianus (talk) 19:15, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
  • While the Kaminoans have been characterised as being against conformity in Legends, I think it's worth noting that Star Wars: The Clone Wars already pushed back against this before the canon reset occurred, with clones becoming more varied and Kaminoans allowing genetically defective clones like 99 to exist. The line from fans that Kaminoans would never allow a trans clone to exist always felt like one based on real world biases to me as opposed to anything rooted in the text.JM1998 (talk) 19:22, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
    • I'd argue that's one more strike regarding TCW's general disrespect towards Legends content. Demetrius Viridianus (talk) 20:45, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
      • TCW and its odd placement regarding the rest of Legends lore during the Clone Wars has no relevance to this. Fan26 (Talk) 21:08, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
        • His points are valid though. He wasn't speaking on the "odd placement" of TCW. He was speaking of TCW's "disrespect" towards the overarching Legends lore. It's no mystery to anyone that TCW had no regard for the general Legends continuity. Filoni himself has gone on record stating that the Expanded Universe and The Clone Wars television series "don't live in the same universe".^[1] Artemaeus-Creed (talk) 12:22, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
          • Lucasfilm Licensing's stance on TCW was self-evident, whether folks approve or not, it was planned on being gradually folded into the EU continuity per Chee's own assertions on the StarWars.com Message Boards since 2008. This process was ongoing‐as demonstrated by EU materials phasing in/integrating TCW-pertinent information‐until the Walt Disney Company's acquisition of Lucasfilm. An incomplete process it became-yet that was the official state of affairs as it concerns Lucasfilm's approach. What Dave Filoni meant as it concerns the 'different universes' assertion was that TCW was not EU, nor was it ever meant to be. Neither was it ever beholden to the EU, since it was apart of the "pillar of Lucas storytelling" - appealing to Lucas' view that there was his vision for the mythos (which encompassed his Saga films and the television projects he spearheaded), then everything else. It was to explain why TCW would disregard the EU in favour of Lucas' prerogative. Nonetheless, JM1998 is raising a series that remains canonical to the Legends continuity and therefore the information established there is applicable—it is as simple as that. The term 'disrespect' is an odd charged framing which bears no relevance. — Commander Bhatoa (talk) 12:57, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
        • It is directly relevant, as per Artemaeus. Demetrius Viridianus (talk) 07:10, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
  • How we interpret the Kaminoans' philosophies doesn't matter. This isn't an issue of what the lore seems like, simply what the lore states. How one considers the Kaminoan engineering of the clone army doesn't matter for the purposes of writing factual encyclopedia articles, and even if the lore didn't explicitly label all clones as male, then how one considers the Kaminoans still wouldn't matter. Your "impression" of what would've happened to a clone equivalent to Sister in Legends doesn't hold weight, only objectively factual statements on the lore from canonical sources do. Fan26 (Talk) 19:30, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
    • It wasn't intended to "hold weight" much. In my view, what canonical sources say is sufficient. But that's not what's under discussion, is it? What's suggested is overriding the sources. And, aside from the general argument that overriding shouldn't be done lightly, it does matter whether the statement seems fitting or non-fitting with what we otherwise know about the subject. Demetrius Viridianus (talk) 20:45, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
      • There's considering how much in line one statement is with visible evidence, but your above statement is just a discussion of your own opinions on the Kaminoans' views on clone gender derived from how the Kaminoans treated things in general. Relevance matters when presenting an argument, and when discussing gender identities one ought to take care how they phrase things. Fan26 (Talk) 21:08, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
        • It is directly relevant, I expect you see why. Demetrius Viridianus (talk) 07:10, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
        • Echoing Fan's sentiments here. I don't mind people disagreeing with me on this, I've seen a lot of really great arguments for and against in the SH which I recommend people read. But I find using the discussion section to assert the headcanon that Kaminoans would murder any trans clones to be inappropriate and, as a trans woman myself, uncomfortable.JM1998 (talk) 21:16, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Demetrius, your comment here is inappropriate and I request that you acknowledge this by retracting it. OOM 224 (he/him/they) 21:23, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
    • I do not retract it, however, I can mark it as special since it seems it is getting people sidetracked.
    • I don't see anything inappropriate with his comment. He is merely articulating his perspective on the matter, a prerogative to which he is unequivocally entitled. It seems that you hold a contrary opinion, which is your right. However, this divergence in viewpoint does not warrant you canceling him. Artemaeus-Creed (talk) 12:22, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
      • As someone who (as I stated prior in the SH) is not taking a stance either way because I just don't hold stake in the issue: disagree. Wookieepedia's admins can and will continue to ask users to not make flippant comments about how if trans individuals are discovered, ah well, they'll just be "annihilated" even if they do exist, so no worries, we won't have to deal with it in citations because they'll just be dead. That is very much inappropriate for this site, and irregardless of whether we do alter our citation practices or not, definitely does make trans editors in real life uncomfortable.—spookywilloww^talk 15:03, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
        • I have to ask whether Sith murdering children or torturing people for the sake of their pain also makes people uncomfortable... that's, like, part of the point. (Legends) Kaminoans are not good. Demetrius Viridianus (talk) 07:10, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
          • That's a false equivalence. There's a big difference between confirmed, canonical actions presented as part of an artistic experience and gleefully launching into speculation about characters murdering minorities as a way to dismiss discussion.JM1998 (talk) 10:59, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
      • People absolutely have the right to disagree with other people and to express their disagreement. The Wookieepedia administration does not "cancel" on the basis of opinions but moderates the site based on how opinions are expressed. My own or others' personal decisions either way in the vote above does not impact the judgement here, and I will gladly give way for other administrators to intervene. OOM 224 (he/him/they) 15:33, 10 June 2024 (UTC)